Yay for Reposting!
This is about a year old, so bare that in mind when fact-checking.
Thankyou
On my walk back from the UGLi (Undergraduate Library), I had an epiphony of sorts...basically it was an extension of a previous idea I've had about college that puts everything in economic (and therefore politically viable) terms.
First, let me describe The Tragedy of the Commons. The phrase was coined describing cow farmers. See, cow farmers had two choices of where they could have their cows graze: their own fields or the common field. Of course, all the farmers brought their cows to the common field until it was completely destroyed. In truth, if they had all regulated their use of the common field and balanced between their own fields and the common field better ALL the cows would have been better fed. However, if they all agreed to regulate their use of the common field, the incentive to cheat on the agreement. It's an infinitely repeated Prisoner's Dilemma.
The same thing is happening now with fishing on the High Seas. Every fishing boat wants to catch as many fish as possible, because it won't affect the quantity of fish supplied enough to affect the price. However, since every boat does it, quantity supplied does change, and price drops. Compound that with the fact that overfishing causes it to take longer for the fish populations to replenish, so fishing boats need to go further and further out for longer and longer to get the same catch (I think this is what The Perfect Storm was about? I never saw it). If they would all catch fewer fish ALL of them would be better off, but since they all catch as many as possible, the price they get goes down and their costs go up. Competition vs. Collusion in a prisoner's dilemma, competition leads to the tragedy of the commons.
Now, let's talk about college. College education clearly increases social awareness and overall well-being of society. Thus, the government subsidizes college education (for example: I pay $10G for a $40G education, thankyou to the State of Michigan for naively believing that I'm actually going to stick around and use my education to better the economy of Michigan). Since college has gotten cheaper, more people are going and increasing the supply of educated labor. Since supply is increasing, price (wages) of educated labor drops. Simultaneously, the increase in supply of educated labor has made it possible to require a college education, and so demand for educated labor rises, increasing wages, but not enough to offset aforementioned decrease. Since demand for educated labor rises, demand for uneducated labor must fall, lowering those wages and creating more incentive for student to go to college, students who would not (and probably should not) have otherwise gone (read: "I'm here to party" or "I'm here because my parents made me). As more people go to college, the value of the education decreases (decreasing marginal returns on government investment), but it still becomes more and more mandatory (not unlike high school).
Note: I'm well aware that our current spending power is much higher than it used to be. This does not disprove what I'm saying for two reasons:
1.) Nothing happens in a vacuum. There are other factors at play (e.g. stock market, increased housing prices, minimum wage, other government policies, unions, etc.) besides just increasing college enrollment
2.) The de facto "mandatory-ness" of college is a fairly recent development and therefore hasn't fully shown its effects on the economy just yet.
Now, there is virtually no job that requires a high school education but not a college education (completing high school is merely a signal, to use game theory terminology, and gives some small protection against recessions). That's because high school education is so common now, as college education gets more common, it's going to be required more, and then grad school will become the new college (in fact, it already is for many professions). This is there the tragedy comes in. The more people go to college, the more college education is required, the more wages sink for everyone--college graduates and non-college graduates alike--the more lost productivity (four to eight years is a long time).
Furthermore, college has always been a factor in increasing the rich-poor gap. When college was more rare only the rich could afford it and therefore it aided the rich in getting richer. Now that college is much cheaper and much more common, only the poor who cannot afford it don't go (I know there exceptions, I'm talking in generalities, not anecdotes). Thus, college (or rather, the cost of college) facilitates the poor getting poorer. If the rich-poor gap grows because the rich are getting richer, that's not a problem, macroeconomically speaking--ethics and fairness aside--but if it's going because the poor are getting poorer, that has macroeconomic consequences.
I'm not sure what the exact ratio is for percentage of the population should go to college in equilibrium, but I'm pretty sure this isn't it. For every individual there are high incentives to go to college, but for society as a whole, it's harmful. It is, in a sense, a tragedy of the commons. In an attempt to make everyone equal it hurts everyone. Which then begs the question, "Why does the government keep encouraging this?" It may help us compete internationally, but as more and more steps are taken to isolate ourselves, it seems like a silly contradiciton. And ultimately self-defeating since it causes problems (such as debt, lower wages--which are still too high to compete in manufacturing internationally, less productivity, more substance abuse, etc.) in the domestic economy making it more difficult to compete.
That's not even taking into acount the changes in college environment. This is certainly not an exhaustive list, but it's a small start:
1.) Colleges still want to make it possible for students to graduate, so they dumb down the classes in order to reach more people
2.) 500-person lectures, 'nough said.
3.) The people who come to college because they "need" to, but when they get here all they do is party, which makes studying more difficult for everyone...and pop my bike tires because apparently being drunk makes it seem like breaking a bottle in the street is a wonderful idea.
4.) So much more competitive, which is a bad thing when there are externalities (in this case stress).
5.) I could go on, but you get the jist.
Perhaps "Tragedy of the Commons" isn't the best term, but it sounds dramatic and it's certainly related: this is still an infinitely repeated simultaneous game, though perhaps not the traditional prisoner's dilemma-type game. What are the long term consequences of sending as many people as possible to college? How is this going to change the aggregated economy? How is this going to affect different industries? What is the optimal ratio between college-goers and college-not-goers?
The tattooed economist sends his love